The US economy is losing up to a billion dollars a week because of the fiscally irresponsible decision to end long-term unemployment benefits, a Harvard economist said on Friday.

Professor Lawrence Katz based his assessment on official forecasts of the impact to the economy of 1.3 million jobless Americans losing benefits

The benefits, which apply to people who are unemployed for longer than six months, expired last week after a bipartisan budget deal on federal spending for the next two years failed to include a reauthorisation of the program.

Democrats have launched a sustained push to reintroduce the federal program, and a Senate vote on a bipartisan bill to restore the benefits for three months is expected early next week.

On Friday, Democrats in the House of Representatives released a state-by-state breakdown of Labor Department figures, showing the number of people who lost federal benefits when they expired on Saturday. The 1.3 million affected Americans are losing on average $305 per week. In total, Democrats said $400m had been taken out of the pockets of job seekers across the country.

The US economy is losing up to a billion dollars a week because of the fiscally irresponsible decision to end long-term unemployment benefits, a Harvard economist said on Friday.

That the US Economy is losing a Billion dollars a week because of the decision to end long-term unemployment benefits is the kind of statement only a left-wing demagogue could utter.

What about the fact that the US Economy is saving a billion dollars a week by curtailing spending?

On Friday, Democrats in the House of Representatives released a state-by-state breakdown of Labor Department figures, showing the number of people who lost federal benefits when they expired on Saturday. The 1.3 million affected Americans are losing on average $305 per week. In total, Democrats said $400m had been taken out of the pockets of job seekers across the country.

Taken out of the pockets. Taken out of the pockets. What is the source of this money? Does this money grow on trees? It' money tacked on to the budget that will either have to be paid or eventually have the government declared insolvent. What sort of Harvard Economist is ignorant enough to make a statement as meaningless as that? Obvbiously, when it comes to the villification of Republicans it may be as misguided, demented a statement possible.

The kind of people who believe if you drive a chain off your front wheels, it will make your rear wheels have power. Maybe we can convince them that they can quench their thirst by drinking their own blood.

..... People that are unemployed for a long term without any other income are pretty much on the verge of being unemployable .... they should then be transitioned to welfare or other government programs available to them.

The trouble is he is correct. The government are not going to give the money back to those they took it from so it is not going to be available to be spent within the system say on food etc.

Yes it is money they will save and you have to start somewhere - I would suggest though that they ought to start in Washington and lead by example. When people see Obama on constant holiday and the rest of Washington awash with money trying to buy influence it’s no wonder they feel entitled to the money of others - heck their leaders are almost drowning in the stuff!

Take 1.3 million Federal Jobs, cut their pay in half and use that money to hire the 1.3 million unemployed!

This way we get twice the value out of our already existing high-priced welfare public servants by forced sacrifice and compassion for the unemployed as well as wealth distribution that Barry wants. 1.3 million instantly employed and problem solved! .

What about the fact that the US Economy is saving a billion dollars a week by curtailing spending?

What about the cost of the lost productivity of the 1.3 million jobless Americans.

I am quite sure that those Americans if they had jobs would contribute more to the economy than the average $305 per week that they receive in unemployment benefits.

Paying these people not to work makes it easier for them not to seek work. If they are only half heartedly looking for work they are less likely to find work. Many will simply wait for a job to fall in their lap. Others will wait for a job they want to show up rather than take a less desirable job until they can find a job they want if they have some income.

It is human nature. But Democrat dont really acknowledge the dark side of human nature. If they did they wouldnt be Democrats.

18
posted on 01/03/2014 4:24:22 PM PST
by Pontiac
(The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)

Um.... What? Not stealing money to pay for bums who refuse to take a job after 2 years, is harming the economy? Seriously? How can people actually think this way? I think my brain just broke right now attempting to understand it.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.